Another View: Vote on farm bill tells a larger story

One of the greatest political alliances to fly beneath the radar has been the connection between Republicans from the farm-belt states and Democrats who represent poorer constituencies, often in inner cities.

Every time a farm bill comes before Congress, fiscal conservatives wring their hands over the cost while free-market economists without constituencies enriched by the legislation grumble about how the government is subsidizing when it should be standing aside. None of this makes much difference because when the bill comes to a vote, rural Republicans and urban Democrats stand shoulder-to-shoulder to pass it.

The reason is food stamps, a lifeline for poor people in America. Is the program abused? Occasionally. Is it humane? Generally.

Food stamps, which are formally known as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, also help farmers sell what they produce. If the poor cannot afford food, major consumers would consume less and farmers would earn less.

So, bound by mutual self-interest, senators and representatives beholden to these constituencies work together. It may be one of the least heralded, but most important, examples of bipartisanship going for us today. As a result, people get fed, farmers make a profit and everyone is happy.

Well, not everyone, which is why the nearly $1 trillion farm bill awaiting congressional action is in trouble.

Although the bill cuts $20.5 billion from food stamp costs, the conservative Heritage Foundation argues that "it isn't a 'farm bill.' It's a food stamp bill," and as such perpetuates a social program the foundation opposes. Legislators who march to that tune will vote against it.

Some Democrats oppose the bill because they feel the food stamp cuts are too deep, and they are prepared to vote against it as well.

The coalition that has united to pass farm legislation for decades may not survive.

It is the task of House Speaker John Boehner, an Ohio Republican who represents an agricultural state, to hold together as much of the old alliance as possible to get the measure through. If he fails, bipartisanship will take another blow. Many more and there will be nothing left.

--The Anniston (Ala.) Star

Update: House kills bill

The House on Thursday broadly rejected the farm bill, which could signal a shift in the way Congress views agriculture policy.

Farm issues once had enormous clout on Capitol Hill, but the healthy agriculture economy and an increased interest in cutting spending have worked against farm-state lawmakers who are now trying to push a farm bill through for a third year in a row.

The five-year, half-trillion dollar measure would have expanded some subsidies while saving about $4 billion annually overall, including a 3 percent cut in the almost $80 billion-a-year food stamp program. Thursday's was 234-195 against the bill, with 62 Republicans voting "no," arguing it was too expensive.

Lawmakers on the agriculture committees have for decades added food stamps to farm bills to garner urban votes. But that marriage has made passage harder this year.

The defeat is a victory for conservative taxpayer and environmental groups, historic opponents of the bill.

--Associated Press

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Another View: Vote on farm bill tells a larger story

One of the greatest political alliances to fly beneath the radar has been the connection between Republicans from the farm-belt states and Democrats who represent poorer constituencies, often in